This could be bad...real bad.
[quote]It’s important to recognize, though, that this assessment of the collapse of diversity in the field overlooks two important factors.
[quote]The first is that we’re really only talking about racial and ethnic diversity. Sens. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) and Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.) will appear in December, as will candidates who would become the first Jewish (Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders) or openly gay (South Bend, Ind., Mayor Pete Buttigieg) presidents in U.S. history.
[quote]The second is that one reason that the field is narrowing to mostly white candidates is Democratic voters overwhelmingly support white candidates. The Post’s most recent primary poll, conducted with ABC News, showed that white candidates earned more than 80 percent of all support from Democratic primary voters, driven by the two-thirds eaten up by former vice president Joe Biden, Warren and Sanders. White men got just under 60 percent of all support.
So where the fuck is the problem, then? Black voters assessed the two black candidates over the course of this year and five debates, and they obviously found them lacking.
by Anonymous | reply 1 | December 4, 2019 10:24 AM |
I don’t understand why this is being depicted as “bad.” The “Democratic field” has consisted of candidates for the presidential nomination. Only one person can be nominated.
There were 28 Democratic candidates. Thirteen of them have dropped out of the race. Of the 13 who have dropped out, 11 are white.
I don’t get what people want to have happen. Everyone drops out except minority candidates regardless of support from voters and donors?
by Anonymous | reply 2 | December 4, 2019 10:28 AM |
Deval, Booker, Castro... go support those with your money and time if you're so scared of an all-white field, then, author of this article. 🙄
by Anonymous | reply 3 | December 4, 2019 10:30 AM |
[quote]Everyone drops out except minority candidates regardless of support from voters and donors?
I know, so patronising. Let's keep them in because they're precious and speshul.
by Anonymous | reply 4 | December 4, 2019 10:32 AM |
OP is concerned!
by Anonymous | reply 5 | December 4, 2019 10:36 AM |
OP sounds [italic]concerned[/italic].
by Anonymous | reply 9 | December 4, 2019 10:38 AM |
I get that the multiple posts thing is a Datalounge glitch, but this morning it's kind of handy, because it seems to only be affecting our early morning political troll. Makes weeding out his comments from various IPs a lot easier.
by Anonymous | reply 10 | December 4, 2019 10:42 AM |
If you want Castro and Booker to be on the stage just to provide racial diversity, even when they don't qualify or aren't your picks, that's literally the definition of tokenisation. And it's not a good look.
by Anonymous | reply 11 | December 4, 2019 11:09 AM |
I am really thrown by the mixed messages from the media and pundits.
Before yesterday, uber-lefty Democrats insisted Kamala Harris is evil and that she has no place contending for the Democratic nomination because she is a former prosecutor whose record is supposedly anti-Democratic. I know several black people who feel this way about her, that she would have been one of the worst nominees for black Americans because of her prosecutorial record. The New York Times Daily podcast has dedicated at least two full episodes to exploring what is wrong with Kamala Harris. The most recent, linked here, was published a week and a half ago. There have been reports of a campaign in chaos and disarray, and allegations that Harris can’t manage her campaign in a way necessary to become president.
Yesterday she took her name out of consideration and now the media and pundits are calling the party racist.
Prior to her pulling out, it was all criticisms of the woman from all sides, based on her actual merits and record and perceived character. After, it’s all defenses of the woman based on her ethnicity.
I feel like Harris has been misrepresented and mistreated throughout the entire process. She’s smart and I believe she’s a fundamentally decent person, but she has been reduced to qualities that are totally reductive.
by Anonymous | reply 12 | December 4, 2019 11:11 AM |
r12 You nailed it and it just reveals how irrational and fickle Twitter has become. Also, tear down the black woman and then rally behind her after she drops out as a direct result of your tearing her down? There has got to be a word for that.
by Anonymous | reply 13 | December 4, 2019 11:17 AM |
OP thanks you for posting your patriotic concern that the democrats who are not patriots like you are not in favor of the peoples of color of our nation. You are to be congratulated for your excellent concern that the peoples of color are being rejected by the leftist socialists and thusly they should become good republicans who are patriots. Thanks you again for your concerns.
by Anonymous | reply 14 | December 4, 2019 11:22 AM |
The democratic field was all white in 2016. So what's the problem?
by Anonymous | reply 15 | December 4, 2019 11:22 AM |
R13 Yes, but don’t reduce it to Twitter. I mentioned and linked to The New York Times specifically to demonstrate that the news media has been driving (or doing all it can to influence, anyway) the nomination based on opinion editors’/columnists’ and TV pundits’ preferences. It really is not just social media. MSNBC has been critical of Harris’s record, as has The Guardian, and presumably other news outlets to which I don’t pay as much attention.
The article linked here is from January 2019. The Times has wanted to knock her out since she joined the race. Now watch as they participate in the race baiting.
by Anonymous | reply 16 | December 4, 2019 11:25 AM |
I'd call that 'childish', R13
by Anonymous | reply 17 | December 4, 2019 11:43 AM |
R12, wrong. Pete's gotten way worse treatment.
The mainstream media was always pro kamala. Look at the attacks Tulsi got for rightfully calling out Kamlas record. The pundits treated Gabbard like she committed Blasphemy!
by Anonymous | reply 18 | December 4, 2019 12:05 PM |
The people who complain about Democratic candidates being all white would never mention an all-white Republican field of candidates.
by Anonymous | reply 19 | December 4, 2019 12:10 PM |
The media loves their arcs - downfalls, redemptions, comebacks etc... more than they love any candidate in particular.
by Anonymous | reply 20 | December 4, 2019 12:11 PM |
R18 Until very recently, Buttigieg has gotten mostly favorable media coverage from what I’ve seen. The NY Times Daily podcast, again, issued at least two episodes about Kamala Harris and both were focused on what’s wrong with her. Conversely, a couple of weeks ago, they did a 40-minute interview with Buttigieg that basically just allowed him to tell his story on his own terms, almost entirely favorably. The only criticism I recall from the podcast was host Michael Barbarro suggesting to Buttigieg that he is so perfect on paper that one might suspect he has crafted a life story specifically to become a perfect presidential candidate.
But the “black people hate Buttigieg and nothing will win them over” storyline certainly has banged down the favorable coverage. That’s all I hear about him now. He was the golden child for so long and now they’re depicting him as if David Duke were his godfather.
by Anonymous | reply 21 | December 4, 2019 12:12 PM |
The bigots are out early this morning on this thread.
by Anonymous | reply 22 | December 4, 2019 12:12 PM |
r21 That narrative is slowly starting to subside as more and more reporters realise they can't ignore the hard polling data of him having roughly the same national support among black people as Warren. It was pretty rough there for a while, though.
by Anonymous | reply 23 | December 4, 2019 12:15 PM |
[quote]The democratic field was all white in 2016. So what's the problem?
Nobody was woke. Or something.
by Anonymous | reply 24 | December 4, 2019 12:17 PM |
Maybe whites are just more progressive than blacks.
by Anonymous | reply 25 | December 4, 2019 12:24 PM |
R23 It still seems rough to me. Last night I saw a black woman pundit on MSNBC who said Pete Buttigieg is “very problematic” and that “now three birther videos have come out, and more are SURE to surface! He remains very problematic for black voters.”
I hadn’t heard about Pete being a birther. I googled it. Here’s a Mediaite story showing video of him making a joke at birthers’ expenses and explaining that a short clip of the video was put onto social media out of context and the MSNBC pundit tweeted it with a sad face emoji. Yet she was on MSNBC just last night discussing it as if Buttigieg is a birther with a long history of racism, and no one corrected her. This is why MSNBC sometimes really is the left-wing Fox News. He’s being misrepresented as shockingly racist, and really what he is “guilty” of is what most white people are guilty of, which is naivety/ignorance about racism by virtue of us not living nonwhite people’s lives and never taking the time to really listen and believe what nonwhite people say. That is a systemic and cultural problem we need to fix, but it’s not the same as Buttigieg being intentionally discriminatory.
by Anonymous | reply 26 | December 4, 2019 12:26 PM |
r26 MSNBC truly seems unhinged when it comes to Pete. I don't get it. No facts, just personal feelings and impressions all the time. Aren't they reporters, or at least trying to pretend to be reporters?
And yes, that video has been making the rounds on Twitter yesterday and today. He told the (admittedly bad) joke at a dinner in a room of 500 Democrats, btw. Apparently, no one is allowed to make fun of birthers apart from Obama. Who also sold birtherism merch through his own merch store...
by Anonymous | reply 27 | December 4, 2019 12:32 PM |
R26 that pundit was Zerlina Maxwell. Now she is truly one lying MF.
by Anonymous | reply 28 | December 4, 2019 12:35 PM |
It's the all-white Republican field that I'm afraid of;
by Anonymous | reply 29 | December 4, 2019 12:39 PM |
If we didn't have such a ridiculously long primary season this would be less of a problem. I would much rather have these candidates bow out because they didn't get enough votes than because of polls and financial burdens.
by Anonymous | reply 30 | December 4, 2019 12:39 PM |
r28 Oh, god, that explains it - Zerlina is THE WORST. Definitely Fox News material. 😩
by Anonymous | reply 31 | December 4, 2019 12:43 PM |
R27, exactly Pete has always been treated suspicion and hostility over there. Meanwhile Kamala is some woke PC totally evolved queen who Is above questioning.
by Anonymous | reply 32 | December 4, 2019 12:43 PM |
I heard Zerlina's co-pundits have been complaining recently because she kept making everything about race when it came to Kamala. Serves her right.
by Anonymous | reply 33 | December 4, 2019 12:46 PM |
Somebody on my twitter feed occasionally retweets Zerlina, so she randomly pops up on my feed. Everything with her is telling blatant lies about Pete, followed by her fans agreeing with everything she says.
The first time I saw that, they were telling some extreme lie. I had no idea who she was. Her m.o. is completely twist Pete’s words around to mean the exact opposite of what they mean, or refuse to acknowledge things he has done to benefit the black community.
She’s a Kamala fan, right? She’s still attacking Pete. I guess that’s “revenge” for Kamala dropping out. She’s unhinged. What is she doing on MSNBC? Can’t they find a pundit who isn’t mentally disturbed? Just putting that nut job on there is irresponsible.
by Anonymous | reply 34 | December 4, 2019 12:56 PM |
Pete's not a birther, that's ridiculous.
by Anonymous | reply 35 | December 4, 2019 12:57 PM |
Zerlina or Merlin the magician, it doesn’t really matter. She’s one person whom MSNBC presumably pays to issue forth her opinion on its network, and when she claimed last night that Buttigieg is a birther, no one corrected her. I did a double take just like the meme guy but I figured it had to be true because there were several people on the program and not one challenged her about it. That’s Fox News-level propagandizing and smearing of an otherwise viable candidate with false information.
by Anonymous | reply 36 | December 4, 2019 1:00 PM |
r34 She dismissed Pete's rapid response guy's correction of her lies a couple of days ago because it was written by a white man. When the other half of the rapid response team - a black woman - chimed in asking why she's erasing her, everyone around Zerlina died inside. Bitch makes EVERYTHING about race, it's exhausting to watch.
by Anonymous | reply 37 | December 4, 2019 1:01 PM |
She is doubling down on calling Buttigieg a birther.
by Anonymous | reply 38 | December 4, 2019 1:02 PM |
Some people say Zerlina is hateful because Kamala dropped out or because he was beating Kamala in the polls. Not true. She was hateful towards Pete long before that.
I believe she is a former Clinton campaign staffer. With a team of people like that it snowed wonder Clinton didnt win
by Anonymous | reply 39 | December 4, 2019 1:06 PM |
*it is no wonder
by Anonymous | reply 40 | December 4, 2019 1:07 PM |
By the way, Rodericka is one of Pete's rapid response people and she corrects these sorts of lies on a daily basis. She was having Sirota for breakfast just yesterday. If you're ever confused about a Pete smear you hear a pundit say, go to her account because chances are, she's probably on it already with facts. She spars with Zerlina as well now and then.
A troll called her "uppity" yesterday and it... did not turn out that well for him. 😄
by Anonymous | reply 41 | December 4, 2019 1:07 PM |
Another one of Pete's rapid response people is Matt Corridoni, who previously worked on Seth Moulton's campaign, and started his job just this week. He's also been taking on Sirota's ravings.
by Anonymous | reply 42 | December 4, 2019 1:09 PM |
And here's Pete's director of rapid response. Most disinformation is busted by him.
by Anonymous | reply 43 | December 4, 2019 1:10 PM |
When are we going to double down on the black community for being completely homophobic and bring that to the forefront? Blacks get a complete pass for homophobia, which is not fair. I think think this should be brought to to attention not just by the LGBT community but by our allies and supporters. I think having Jewish and Gay front runners is pretty ground breaking, even if they are white. Gays are the one last community it is OK to fuck with w/o SJW crackdown.
by Anonymous | reply 44 | December 4, 2019 1:33 PM |
The voting public does not want diversity. Even black voters will only support a white candidate.
by Anonymous | reply 45 | December 4, 2019 1:34 PM |
Here she is saying, toward the end of the clip, that “Mayor Pete has had three birther videos come out just this week. Three, just this week!” And Chris Hayes just lets it go.
by Anonymous | reply 46 | December 4, 2019 1:37 PM |
Here's an interesting fact: Iowa might be too white to go first, but Hillary would have won the nomination had South Carolina gone first back in 2008. Black voters are more savvy than pundits give them credit for; most don't give a shit about this identity politics foolishness the hyperwoke coastal Twitterati are obsessed with.
by Anonymous | reply 47 | December 4, 2019 1:39 PM |
This is interesting. Some tweets in this thread refer to Susan Rice as a potential VP for Pete. I can see Susan Rice being better VP material for any Democratic candidate, including Biden, than less experienced people like Stacy Abrams. She was an Obama administration person, which makes her a good fit for Biden as well. And she has a book out right now.
I wondered if the reason she did this was as a surrogate for Obama, who’s against all the in-party infighting.
by Anonymous | reply 48 | December 4, 2019 1:44 PM |
[quote]And Chris Hayes just lets it go.
r46 Because 1) she's black and so he won't refute anything she has to say on that matter and 2) Chris Hayes is a hardcore Bernie Bro. I recall when he was on PSA and was laughing about the mere notion of Pete being in the race. It's just how it is with these pundits; they're usually not very attuned to the real world.
by Anonymous | reply 49 | December 4, 2019 1:44 PM |
My best friend at work is an older black woman (67), and Biden is her favorite by far. Harris was her least favorite by far. She seems OK with Buttigieg but she does seem to harbor some unspoken grudge against him.
I’m a 41 year-old white guy. I like Buttigieg a lot, I like Harris fine, and watching Biden makes me cringe and I honestly feel like he will be less dangerous but only slightly less embarrassing than Trump as president.
Overall, though, we agree that anyone at all is better than what we have and we just want people to drop out of the fucking race already and galvanize behind a candidate. Jesus.
by Anonymous | reply 50 | December 4, 2019 1:46 PM |
Susan Rice doesn't have enough "pizazz" to be anybody's running mate.
She's hard to look at as well.
by Anonymous | reply 51 | December 4, 2019 1:47 PM |
r48 I like Rice but she's a career bureaucrat who hasn't campaigned once in her entire life. Doubt she has the stomach for it either. And yes, she's said great things about Pete in the past months.
by Anonymous | reply 52 | December 4, 2019 1:47 PM |
Boy, is this thread fake as fuck.
FAKE. THREAD. CLOSED!!!
by Anonymous | reply 53 | December 4, 2019 1:48 PM |
R48 That makes sense. Rice has been making the media rounds to promote her book and she seems down to Earth and always has interviewers lead with a question about having one Republican and one Democrat child, giving her an opportunity to preach compromise and unity.
by Anonymous | reply 54 | December 4, 2019 1:49 PM |
Well, this is the first time I've ever heard a thread being accused of being "fake."
by Anonymous | reply 55 | December 4, 2019 1:49 PM |
R52, then maybe she’s angling for an administrative position. Or do you think she’s acting on behalf of Obama? Obama isn’t going to endorse anybody, but he’s said multiple times he doesn’t like all the infighting. That sounds like the kind of behind the scenes stuff he would do.
It might not even be personal on behalf of Pete, it’s just too soon to know who’s going to get the nomination, and Obama doesn’t want the most viable candidates destroyed before we get there.
by Anonymous | reply 56 | December 4, 2019 1:52 PM |
Everyone has good takes in this thread and I want to add my support on Zerlina Maxwell being a complete tool--I call her the "queen of bad takes" since everything, EVERY THING that she says is almost invariably wrong or skewed, and yes she does make EVERY THING about race to a nauseating degree. From what I've seen she's just as homophobic as Joy Reid and I think I actually get LESS informed on politics every time I listen to her.
r53 Bad news for you but this thread is real!
REALITY THREAD REOPENED!!!!
by Anonymous | reply 57 | December 4, 2019 1:52 PM |
Susan Rice unfortunately shares a last name and held the same National Security Adviser position as Republican shill and Bush ass-licker Condaleeza Rice.
Putting her name on a ballot is a mistake.
by Anonymous | reply 58 | December 4, 2019 1:58 PM |
[quote]then maybe she’s angling for an administrative position.
r56 This is more likely, I think. Which is fine as she's a supremely competent person. She has met many world leaders during her time as ambassador and it's very telling that she has singled out Pete for having "presidential character and temperament." Also said his Douglass Plan is the most comprehensive out of the entire field, which goes beyond stock platitudes.
by Anonymous | reply 59 | December 4, 2019 1:58 PM |
R44, go to hell troll. You are trying to derail the conversation by making it about black people and homophobia go fuck youself.
by Anonymous | reply 60 | December 4, 2019 2:00 PM |
MSNBC is NOT reality. Calling them fake news might be the one thing Trump was right about.
by Anonymous | reply 61 | December 4, 2019 2:01 PM |
R48, Susan's wonderful. She defended Pete's Douglass plan on a radio show a couple of weeks ago.
by Anonymous | reply 62 | December 4, 2019 2:03 PM |
Yes, r44 is not doing any Democratic candidates - even the straight white ones - any favours. This divisiveness ultimately benefits the Republicans/ Russians only.
by Anonymous | reply 63 | December 4, 2019 2:03 PM |
This whole thread and article is decisive.
by Anonymous | reply 64 | December 4, 2019 2:05 PM |
r64 Gurl...
by Anonymous | reply 65 | December 4, 2019 2:08 PM |
If the inevitable white candidate picks a person of color for Veep, I think we're good.
by Anonymous | reply 66 | December 4, 2019 2:09 PM |
Can't believe we are discussing this as a problem. It's almost as if the Dems what to throw every road block in the way to success. All anyone cares about is will the nominee help out those of us who are getting screwed over right now by the current administration and it's backers.
I give no fucks about the gender or color of the nominee. The Black community has voted for white candidates since we got the right to vote and we will again. We care about what the candidate has in their platform and will it help or hurt us, which I have to assume is what most thinking people care about.
They really need to stop this identity politics bullshit and just come up with a great candidate.
by Anonymous | reply 67 | December 4, 2019 2:11 PM |
r66 It's basically certain at this point that that is exactly what will end up happening.
by Anonymous | reply 68 | December 4, 2019 2:11 PM |
Who's the guy in the preview image at r46? His hair is so fab.
by Anonymous | reply 69 | December 4, 2019 2:15 PM |
Sally Kohn at CNN is just as vicious:
"Obviously I’m no centrist but it’s downright effed up that smart, compelling, *very* experienced, centrist Democratic candidates of color are floundering while a smart but wildly inexperienced, centrist white mayor of teeny tiny city is surging.
Bad look, Democrats"
First of all bitch when did your Bernie hating ass decide to become a "progressive".
by Anonymous | reply 70 | December 4, 2019 2:38 PM |
This Zerlina Maxwell person sounds like she posts on Datalounge. Only in the Buttigieg threads though, of course, screaming about how DL is just like a Klan rally.
by Anonymous | reply 71 | December 4, 2019 2:51 PM |
My husband has African American clients & coworkers & they don’t consider Kamala Harris an African American. Both her parents were immigrants. Her mother was a Brahmin. Her father was Caribbean. Neither parent grew up having an African American life. Harris spent part of her childhood in Berkeley & was bused to white schools. She went to HS in Canada. Her husband is white.
They consider her South Asian American from a privileged background,
by Anonymous | reply 72 | December 4, 2019 3:20 PM |
R70 get that bitch
by Anonymous | reply 73 | December 4, 2019 3:22 PM |
When did “progressive” become shorthand for “blame Israel first”?
by Anonymous | reply 74 | December 4, 2019 3:57 PM |
OP, Die you fucking troll
by Anonymous | reply 75 | December 4, 2019 4:00 PM |
Having whispers circulate that Pete is a closet Repub will only help him in the general election
by Anonymous | reply 76 | December 4, 2019 4:12 PM |
I was shocked by the interview Rachel did with Pete. The sneering, the eye rolls...like he was the enemy?
by Anonymous | reply 77 | December 4, 2019 5:48 PM |
r77 She's just super competitive. She was also a Rhodes scholar, dontcha know?
by Anonymous | reply 78 | December 4, 2019 5:50 PM |
R78 And she was also out of the closet before his ass, too!
by Anonymous | reply 79 | December 4, 2019 5:52 PM |
R77 It doesn’t surprise me. Pete Buttigieg has been pigeonholed as not one of the anointed ones, and that is enough to make him disdained by established influencers. He also is moderate and he asks questions and says things that are not established Democratic opinions, and that used to be characteristic of the Democratic party, but at this time in history, Democrats are getting closer to you’re-with-us-or-against-us-and-no-questions-asked attitude that Republicans adhere to. So—no questions will be entertained, including questioning certain DNC mandates. One of those mandates at this time is that white men are automatically assumed to be racist by nature, with the unexplained exception of Joe Biden, who is somehow 240 years old and not at all racist. Biden can prattle on senselessly in a manner disturbingly close to the way Trump does, he can say and do things that would offend feminists if anyone else did them, and Rachel and all others in the media will just shrug, giggle, throw out the word “gaffe,” and say it’s endearing.
I’m very moderate. I ask a lot of questions. I consider myself politically independent even though I have always voted for Democrats because I always ask questions and challenge groupthink, and I’ve been accused by many card-carrying Democrats of being “secretly Republican.” I’m not at all. I’ve never voted for a Republican. I do, however, point out that excuses Democrats make for Biden’s mindlessness are perfectly analogous to the excuses Republicans make for Trump’s, and the way MSNBC et al. have embraced Biden regardless of his seeming dementia is no different to me than the way Fox News et al. have embraced Trump’s. It’s disturbing to me. It feels like everyone has sold out their common sense and rational thinking in favor of belonging to cults.
by Anonymous | reply 80 | December 4, 2019 6:01 PM |
He's a progressive speaking with a moderate accent, which is a nifty trick that's bringing moderates and never-Trumper Republicans on board. If elected, he'd be the most progressive president of the past forty years, judging by his policy proposals. But the fact that people don't register that is very handy when it comes to his efforts to build a broad coalition.
by Anonymous | reply 81 | December 4, 2019 6:09 PM |
*I was talking about Pete, not Biden there.
by Anonymous | reply 82 | December 4, 2019 6:10 PM |
I’m so concerned, OP! SO CONCERNED! My god! Only republicans can save us now! The fat fuck and his prostitute cunt of a wife to the rescue! 🙄🙄🙄
by Anonymous | reply 83 | December 4, 2019 6:43 PM |
DEAR HATERS,
YOU SHOULDN'T BE DISCRIMINATING AGAINST POLITICAL CANDIDATES BASED ON RACE.
THE END.
by Anonymous | reply 84 | December 4, 2019 6:48 PM |
TRUMP: White supremacists? Very fine people. Mexicans? Rapists and murderers.
PUBLIC: Wow! Kamala Harris won the first Democratic debate, hands down! That was amazing.
KAMALA HARRIS: No one will give me their money. I quit.
CORY BOOKER: The public is racist!!!
by Anonymous | reply 85 | December 4, 2019 6:50 PM |
The left HATES gay men, especially white ones. The fact that gay men are only attracted to men is “problematic.” So of course they will gloss over black homophobia. It plays right into their narrative, plus they can blame gay men for black homophobia and label them racist in addition to misogynist.
by Anonymous | reply 86 | December 4, 2019 7:14 PM |
African Americans should calm down...another strong black person will come along. Maybe Guillum? I know I spelled his name wrong.
by Anonymous | reply 87 | December 4, 2019 7:21 PM |
They’re responsible for Prop 8 passing, which we’re not allowed to talk about anymore. Now they’re attacking and smearing a historic presidential candidate. Did we do that with Obama? We are not allowed to enjoy the fact that an openly gay man is running for the nomination of a major party and has a decent chance of winning. No, we don’t get to celebrate that at all. I’ll never support a black for anything ever again after this.
by Anonymous | reply 88 | December 4, 2019 9:16 PM |
r87 Black people are (by and large) NOT the ones getting into a tizzy over the "all white democratic field!" As always, it's the woke white people who are the problem. Black people know the value of strategic voting, because unlike the priviledged "woke twitter" white people, black people understand that the name of the game is incremental change and they know that a small victory today and another small victory next year adds up. The "woke twitter" white people, who have always had everything handed to them and have never actually struggled for anything, know nothing about this, and are all too eager to be offended on someone else's behalf. They're insufferable.
by Anonymous | reply 89 | December 4, 2019 9:31 PM |
R89..
by Anonymous | reply 90 | December 4, 2019 11:55 PM |
R89 = Ann Coulter
by Anonymous | reply 91 | December 4, 2019 11:57 PM |
R89 is completely right.
by Anonymous | reply 92 | December 5, 2019 1:37 PM |
Frankly, OP, I'm TERRIFIED.
by Anonymous | reply 93 | December 5, 2019 1:45 PM |
at this point one needs to realize that this next group will only be there for 4 years and will be 1,000x's better than what we have. Once this next group is out we can get going to where we have to go. The next group is going to do nothing but try and repair the damage that Trump has done.
by Anonymous | reply 94 | December 5, 2019 1:48 PM |
r94, It will take a lot longer than just 4 years to even begin to fix all the shit that Trump and Co. have fucked up.
by Anonymous | reply 95 | December 5, 2019 1:49 PM |
it will take at least 10 years to undo but the biggest concentration will be the next 4 years.
by Anonymous | reply 96 | December 5, 2019 3:04 PM |
R88. Like we care about your opinion Boris. Black people must be losing sleep over you.
by Anonymous | reply 97 | December 5, 2019 3:16 PM |
"a black" r88? Yeah you sound like the type who would ever support "a black" for president, I believe you.
NOT.
by Anonymous | reply 98 | December 5, 2019 5:48 PM |
I supported Obama, so fuck you. I’ve overlooked it many times in the past, but not only do they refuse to ditch the homophobia, they double down on it, hiding it (barely) behind the veil of being “woke.” I’ve had enough.
by Anonymous | reply 99 | December 6, 2019 3:25 PM |
R21 , I'm not sure what you are reading or smoking, but Pete has received far harsher scrutiny than Klobuchar and even Harris. And once again, he is labelled as simply a "white guy", with no mention of his sexual orientation, which polls show is a greater barrier to electability than any other minority status. Every time I read this aspect of his life story deliberately omitted, I can only chalk it up to homophobia. Your omission speaks volumes about the challenges he will continue to face in the primaries
by Anonymous | reply 100 | December 6, 2019 3:56 PM |
[quote]The fact that gay men are only attracted to men is “problematic.”
Gay men are problematic because men are problematic. We love what they hate. That is what makes us gay: we only like sexual partners with the same parts we have. Duh! Only a simpleton could define it as anything else.
by Anonymous | reply 101 | December 7, 2019 4:05 PM |
It's sad that the discussion is about race and not policy, gender and not leadership, sexual orientation and not issues.
So, if the dems don't have a non-white field, people might was well vote for cheeto and the rethugs? Asinine.
by Anonymous | reply 102 | December 7, 2019 4:11 PM |
The extreme Left calls Pete a Republican while Republicans still call him a Communist. It has come to this, folks.
by Anonymous | reply 103 | December 7, 2019 4:14 PM |
The Left only supports self loathing gay men that castrate themselves and change their name to Ashley.
by Anonymous | reply 104 | December 7, 2019 4:58 PM |
Fiddle-dee-dee, R104!
by Anonymous | reply 105 | December 7, 2019 5:06 PM |
As long as there is a woman on the ticket.
The fear is an all WHITE OLD MAN over 70 democratic field
Go away Biden, Sanders, Bloomberg
by Anonymous | reply 106 | December 7, 2019 5:12 PM |
[quote] Prior to her pulling out, it was all criticisms of the woman from all sides, based on her actual merits and record and perceived character. After, it’s all defenses of the woman based on her ethnicity.
Her TIME cover piece was indifferent and contained pointed criticism of her and her record. Pete's was fawning. The media tanked her candidacy.
by Anonymous | reply 107 | December 7, 2019 10:22 PM |